Oookay. Sooo, that’s a yes, they can see my banking. Fucking great (not that it’s very interesting, I can assure you).
Meanwhile, did anyone else read Paul Buchanan on NBR yesterday. Someone asked him what would happen if NZ withdrew from 5 eyes, and if there’d be any security risk.
The answer: the same as what happens when you leave the mafia. Bang bang. Other than that, not so much. Meaning, the main security risk from 5 eyes is 5 eyes.
Great interview thanks Russell.
Hey, you know that thing Snowden said about how easy it is for NSA analysts to basically see anything they want, and he rattled off a list of like email, Facebook, etc. All things which we go through some kind of charade of security protocols, etc.
Well, what about banking data? Can they see that, too?
Is there, in fact, anything at all which is beyond the eyes of others?
I know what you mean. Which is why I agree with Paul Buchanan when he says the best way of managing a spy group is to have robust independent governance of it, which monitors everything it does both before and after it does it.
Clearly, we need something better than what we've got, because what we've got doesn't suit anyone. It doesn't suit Key's opponents because they don't trust Key. And it doesn't suit Key's supporters because the fact that it arouses distrust distracts Key from doing whatever he does that wins him support, like selling state assets or whatever.
Quite a good Q&A with Paul Buchanan over on NBR.
Didn't Guyon make a good point this morning though, that if the gummint thinks I'm a baddy, they issue a warrant. Once they've done that, they can pick up the info. But before all of that, they firstly have to have collected the info. And since they don't know whose to collect they just get everyone's.
The former head of GCSB just told him he was confused between surveillance and something else.
What I like about KDC is his ability to provoke. It was - I think - the first time I've ever attended a do put on by a party that I have no intention of voting for. And I gotta give him cred for that. It was _interesting_.
I suspect that for every 10 votes KDC calls into question across the entire spectrum:
4 L/N votes stay where they are
3 stay home and don't get cast
3 move from L/N to any one of the smaller parties, with a small % of those going to IMP.
Yes, live. He interacted with the audience applause. Oh and said "Sorry, I'm not used to this kind of a reception."
I attended as a lay internet user curious about what these giants of the form might teach me about it.
No question that Snowden was the highlight from that POV. 2 things I learned:
1. How easy it is for an operative like he was to see whatever they like on whoever they like.
2. That meta-data are not only very revealing (even I knew that), but that from an intel analyst’s POV, _even more_ useful than content. Why? As he said “for one thing, meta data doesn’t lie.”
He said in fact that other things being equal, he'd always go for meta data _over_ content.
perating government as if it’s a business whose sole purpose is to get done what it decides needs doing, instead of a government which is meant to do those things on behalf of the people it represents – not just those who voted for it
As I said, not since ever has one government given so much to so few at the expense of so many.
The what now?
Yeh, good ol fashioned direct postal mail.
I can no longer see, read or hear of John Key without feeling that the analysts of Crosby Textor are there in the room/car/office with me.